Church Or Individual? Who Is Most Accountable For Lack Of Correct Understanding?

[rodheadlee]

This is being repeated over and over. But it's obviously not the complete picture. Institutions are accountable at times for things that happen within an organization. Like my example in the OP, a corporation is accountable for a hostile work environment. No one has addressed this yet.

What do you think Jesus Christ thinks about it? Personally I think people should spend more time reading the NT Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. I think you'll get more insight to what Christ thinks. Who was responsible for His crucifiction? The Pharisees, Sadducces, Pilate, Herod? Did Christ hold individuals responsible for their salvation or organizations?

[robuchan]

Bushman wrote about the rod (described it as likely used as other rods were to find water, etc.). This was in his In the Beginnings book, page 98 for about a page and a half. Published 1985. I read that book shortly after it was published....most of my husband's family read it shortly after it was published. My memory says it was a big Christmas present that year. It was a History Book Club selection so all and all there are likely a number who did know it, though I would not be surprised at all if it was less than 1 in 1,000.

I was a little too young in 1985 to be aware of any buzz created with this publication. And by the time I came of age, this was never on my radar screen. You mention this as being an important work vs the “candy” that was available, presumably judging my study choices as being morally inferior. I maintain my church study choice was a product of the environment the church dictated. I was very pliable, very conscientious in trying to do what I felt the brethren wanted me to do with my life. In the time I allocated to non-scripture church/gospel study (which was quite significant—thousands of hours over a 20 year time period age 15 to 35) I chose authors who were former prophets, current or recent general authorities, Talmage, McConkie, Skousen, Nibley, Madsen, other authors I heard quoted in General Conference or by my local church leaders or BYU religion teachers. I avoided Sunstone, Dialogue, and authors who published in these. Sure, I could have done more. But even if I had, it would have been most likely more of the same types of material, and I still never would have come across the 30 or 40 historical facts I refer to in OP.

[robuchan]

What do you think Jesus Christ thinks about it? Personally I think people should spend more time reading the NT Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. I think you'll get more insight to what Christ thinks. Who was responsible for His crucifiction? The Pharisees, Sadducces, Pilate, Herod? Did Christ hold individuals responsible for their salvation or organizations?

You'll notice this is the third or fourth time for me to say in this thread I don't hold The Church or any other organization responsible for my salvation.

[CV75]

Another clarification of a subtle point.

The issue is not whether the church is accountable for not teaching me these 30 or 40 historical facts in church lessons. I'm not taking my argument that far. My claim is that the church is accountable for the absence of my knowledge of these 30 or 40 points. The "hostile learning environment", that the church is responsible for, resulted in the perpetuation of myths, the anti-intellectualism that existed that dissuaded learning from outside sources, etc.

Clearly you did not know where to find these 30 or 40 points. As to the Church’s responsibility for that, the Church’s original priority about fact-finding hinges on instructions found in D&C 123, and did not involve vetting or promoting outside sources of its history that would feed into “the influence of that spirit which hath so strongly riveted the creeds of the fathers, who have inherited lies, upon the hearts of the children, and filled the world with confusion, and has been growing stronger and stronger, and is now the very mainspring of all corruption, and the whole earth groans under the weight of its iniquity.”

So I think countering the spirit that teaches a person not to pray, or not to seek learning by study and by faith is only a hostile environment for that spirit, allowing the Spirit to lead people to whatever source of truth the Lord sees fit for them to possess. The hostile environment is not one against the intellectual who is led by the Spirit (for he will be led to whatever source he needs to complete his good-faith study for the building of Zion), but only against the intellectual who draws and publishes conclusions without the guidance or tempering of the Spirit.

[CV75]

I only learned those things after the internet age.

The Church was carrying out its priorities with the same disadvantage, and with the same audience. The available resources has much to do with how it carries out its mission.

[Calm]

I was a little too young in 1985 to be aware of any buzz created with this publication. And by the time I came of age, this was never on my radar screen. You mention this as being an important work vs the “candy” that was available, presumably judging my study choices as being morally inferior.

This will be my last post on the subject. It is too hard work with too little pay off in understanding since you continually assume the worst possible interpretation. The "candy" was in reference to the Work and the Glory and other historical fiction as opposed to reading actual history. Work and the Glory was 9 volumes long and were thick books, but I know many who read all those who wouldn't touch a real history book if you paid them just because they had it in their mind "history" wasn't interesting....while the reality was they were fascinated by it. I don't judge that preference as morally inferior either...sheesh, we have it on our shelf and my husband enjoyed them greatly. There was nothing in my posts to ever give the appearance that I think people who are less involved in searching out history are morally inferior. That is just absurd because I am one of them. I don't like history unless it's ancient history, I read anything after 1500 AD only as needed.

Why do you insist on interpreting me as insulting? What purpose does that serve for you?

Edited February 10, 2013 by calmoriah

[changed]

But what does a person need to know to gain a testimony?

They need to know how to gain a witness for themselves.

[robuchan]

This will be my last post on the subject. It is too hard work with too little pay off in understanding since you continually assume the worst possible interpretation. The "candy" was in reference to the Work and the Glory and other historical fiction as opposed to reading actual history. Work and the Glory was 9 volumes long and were thick books, but I know many who read all those who wouldn't touch a real history book if you paid them just because they had it in their mind "history" wasn't interesting....while the reality was they were fascinated by it. I don't judge that preference as morally inferior either...sheesh, we have it on our shelf and my husband enjoyed them greatly. There was nothing in my posts to ever give the appearance that I think people who are less involved in searching out history are morally inferior. That is just absurd because I am one of them. I don't like history unless it's ancient history, I read anything after 1500 AD only as needed.

Why do you insist on interpreting me as insulting? What purpose does that serve for you?

your previous post to that to me was asking how much time I spend playing video games and watching TV vs studying the gospel. Not offensive at all?

Your quote on the "candy"

i was thinking of his previous book which was available in 85 so use this as an example of what people choose even when the good stuff is there and wouldnt take more resources than the candy variety

This is in response to why I would have read other church books and not the Bushman book. Sure seems like you were accusing my reading choices as being candy. But I'm sorry if I took needless offense.

[robuchan]

So far, all I've got is "you should have read more", but no one can tell me how I could have known which books to read.

[rodheadlee]

You'll notice this is the third or fourth time for me to say in this thread I don't hold The Church or any other organization responsible for my salvation.

So what did you lose your testimony of? Christ didn't die for your sins? Christ is not at the head of His church? The new and everlasting covenant isn't true? You guys make it all too difficult letting in whitenoise.

[robuchan]

So what did you lose your testimony of? Christ didn't die for your sins? Christ is not at the head of His church? The new and everlasting covenant isn't true? You guys make it all too difficult letting in whitenoise.

What I lost my testimony of is not relevant to the content of this thread. I think the issue in this thread is an important one to isolate on.

[rodheadlee]

What I lost my testimony of is not relevant to the content of this thread. I think the issue in this thread is an important one to isolate on.

Well I have bad news for you Rob, to me you are the Church. I'm a transient and when i go to a new ward i don't think of the 12 or the 1 or the 70. I think of the people I met in Church on Sunday, how you treat me, the questions you ask in SS or PH if I am allowed to be a part of your ward for a week or 2.

[robuchan]

Well I have bad news for you Rob, to me you are the Church. I'm a transient and when i go to a new ward i don't think of the 12 or the 1 or the 70. I think of the people I met in Church on Sunday, how you treat me, the questions you ask in SS or PH if I am allowed to be a part of your ward for a week or 2.

Sorry, not trying to be a jerk. Just don't want the topic derailed. My loss of testimony came slowly over a very long period of study.

[changed]

So far, all I've got is "you should have read more", but no one can tell me how I could have known which books to read.

Here's what you read:

If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.

There is an infinite number of ways to get something wrong, and only one way to get it right - only one straight and narrow path. Generally, when you really understand the "right" way, why it is right, why it is precious and good - you can quickly see the errors in all the other paths.... If you never come to a deep understanding of what is virtuous/good/lovely - that is when you become confused with other paths....

Once you've had good apple pie, and know what good pie tastes like, then you can distinguish between good and bad pies... if all you have ever tasted was bad pie, then one pie will seem as another, and you won't know the difference, you won't even know it is bad, because you don't have the good one to compare it to.

Edited February 10, 2013 by changed

[Paloma]

Very interesting. Any chance you have a link to an online resource for one of those series. I am curious about it first and second, it would be interesting to see if it could be adapted.

Calmoriah, I sent you a private message ... hope you get it!

[rodheadlee]

Sorry, not trying to be a jerk. Just don't want the topic derailed. My loss of testimony came slowly over a very long period of study.

OK, I can respect that. My answer is YOU are the most accountable for correct understanding. Not the Church, YOU need to study with the Holy Spirit invited to your study period whether it be at Church or at home or at school no matter what book you are reading. Correct understanding can only come when the Holy Spirit bears witness of the Truth of what ever subject you are studying

[CV75]

So far, all I've got is "you should have read more", but no one can tell me how I could have known which books to read.

The Spirit might have guided you.

[ERayR]

I'll bet some of us place the church at a higher standard, when told we have direct revelation from God, unlike the others. That is the difference!

Each individual Church member is responsible for seeking and receiving their own personal revelation. Some do some don't. That is the difference.

[rpn]

Some of it could be that some of those 30 or 40 "fact" aren't facts at all.

[ERayR]

I guess it's a good question. How much reading of books outside the scriptures should be expected. I don't know how fast you read, but I'm a college grad with above average qualifications and would have a very difficult time reading a book a day, even dedicating the entire day to it. Let's say I'm a faithful kid who just wants to do his best, and I ask people in my life: my bishop, stake president, etc, how much time should I spend reading non-scripture church related books per day. During this time period, I have young children, a busy job, and a busy church calling. i want to have enough time to allocate to all of them and include temple and other church service. You think he would counsel me to spend more than 1/2 hour a day? Take a step back and really think about real life and what you're expecting of the average member to remove this accountability issue from himself.

You think it is the Church's responsibility to address your problem information. To me this presents a few logistic problems. Who's problem information does it address first? In which meeting? Using whose interpretation of events? Finally when do we alot time to teach the really important things? You know like faith, repentance, baptism and the laying on of hands. Perhaps a 5 or 6 hour block?

[ERayR]

I guess it's a good question. How much reading of books outside the scriptures should be expected. I don't know how fast you read, but I'm a college grad with above average qualifications and would have a very difficult time reading a book a day, even dedicating the entire day to it. Let's say I'm a faithful kid who just wants to do his best, and I ask people in my life: my bishop, stake president, etc, how much time should I spend reading non-scripture church related books per day. During this time period, I have young children, a busy job, and a busy church calling. i want to have enough time to allocate to all of them and include temple and other church service. You think he would counsel me to spend more than 1/2 hour a day? Take a step back and really think about real life and what you're expecting of the average member to remove this accountability issue from himself.

Who is accountable for you? To give somebody or some organization accountability for your life you also give them great control over your life. If you make somebody else accountable you must give them the power to ensure results. Personally I have a little difficulty in giving someone else that much power over me.

[ERayR]

This is being repeated over and over. But it's obviously not the complete picture. Institutions are accountable at times for things that happen within an organization. Like my example in the OP, a corporation is accountable for a hostile work environment. No one has addressed this yet.

Even in the case of companies and hostile work environment(which is a poor analogy) individuals within the company are held responsible.

[ERayR]

And to be clear it is not the interpretation. It is the actual facts that were never taught in the church but now are coming to light and being acknowledged by scholars like Bushman.

It definitely is interpretation. Information always comes with the bias of the presenter.

[ERayR]

Another clarification of a subtle point.

The issue is not whether the church is accountable for not teaching me these 30 or 40 historical facts in church lessons. I'm not taking my argument that far. My claim is that the church is accountable for the absence of my knowledge of these 30 or 40 points. The "hostile learning environment", that the church is responsible for, resulted in the perpetuation of myths, the anti-intellectualism that existed that dissuaded learning from outside sources, etc.

First off CFR that the "church" fosters a hostile learning environment. Also CFR that there was/is an "anti-intellectualism".

[robuchan]

First off CFR that the "church" fosters a hostile learning environment. Also CFR that there was/is an "anti-intellectualism".

lol at the CFR, you guys crack me up.

I explain what I mean by hostile learning environment and anti-intellectualism in a couple paragraphs in the OP. Go ahead and CFR anything there if you want, I guess.